Mediatization, polarization, and intolerance (between environments, media, and circulation)

Polarization as a structure of intolerance (a communicational issue) 295 cus acts as an aggregator - defining the profile of its participants by this singular dimension. When digital networks aggregate profiles and ideas based on similarities of positions and attitudes, not depend- ing on physical proximity, circuits organized by zones of prior agreement can manifest a process of exclusion of dissenters. In corollary, the ease of exclusion fuels a tendency to internal align- ment, further reducing variations. The risk of exclusion due to deviation leads the participant to abdicate even their small dif- ferences - generating a more automatic cohesion. In this space, the apparent consensus among partici- pants is doubly artificial. It is pre-established in the process of aggregating the participants; and it is not elaborated by process- es of communication and adjustment between them, but by the constant pruning of dissidents, characterizing a singular scope of thought. Such micro-environments are breeding grounds for polarizing postures. 4.2 Second angle Here, we have a more comprehensive and diffuse focus. The offer of interactive technologies and the social experimenta- tions that are developed at all levels and in all areas of action ex- pands the spaces of uncertainty and reduce the effectiveness of previously common interactional patterns. Mediatization stud- ies show increasing porosity at the borders of specialized fields. Patrice Flichy (2016, p. 15) demonstrates that “the knowledge of amateurs, in different fields, places new relationships with specialists, including creating new expertise”. There is a loss of consistency in specialized fields of action - internal participants trigger new experiments, in direct relation with other fields, and with the general system of the environment, in the competition for the expansion of social capital. The diversified experiences of activation and invention based on the affordances (viability) of new technologies dilute, more/less, the defined lines of action. As a result, society is faced with the insufficiency of shared references to organize processes in common. Commu- nication becomes cacophonic, stimulating social anxiety. The feeling of cultural and social insecurity expands. Those who fail